sovereigntyhttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress
Lee Jones's BlogSat, 24 Mar 2018 17:43:22 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.3Sovereignty, Social Order, and Intervention in Revolutionary Timeshttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=847
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=847#respondMon, 07 Oct 2013 12:19:39 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=847I have a new article out in the Review of International Studies, available First Online – it will be out in print next year.

Abstract

This article explores how sovereignty and (non-)intervention are implicated in the (re)production of specific social orders. Sovereignty and the non-interference principle circumscribe ‘domestic’ politics from ‘the international’, defining who is legitimately included or excluded from the struggles that determine political and social orders. State managers seek to admit forces and resources favourable to the order they are seeking to create, whilst excluding those deleterious to it. In revolutionary periods, however, these attempts to ‘cage’ social relations often crumble as transnational forces engage in fierce, multifaceted conflicts overlapping territorial borders. In such circumstances, both norms of non-interference and practices of intervention may be used by dominant forces to help contain the spread of sociopolitical conflict and to strengthen their hand in the struggle to (re)define social order. Sovereignty regimes are thus shaped by the strategies and ideologies of the various social groups locked in conflict at a particular historical moment. This argument is illustrated through the case of Cold War Southeast Asia, where sovereignty and intervention were both used to stabilise capitalist social order and curtail transnational, radical threats from below.

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=8470Fifth review of ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asiahttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=805
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=805#respondSun, 08 Sep 2013 14:15:06 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=805Another review of my book has been published, this one by veteran Southeast Asianist Ramses Amer of Sweden’s Institute for Security and Development Policy. Writing in the Austrian Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, he calls the book

an interesting contribution… the book addresses a highly relevant area of research from both scholarly and policy perspectives… Through its approach and originality, it complements existing literature by offering new insights. The book can be recommended to the scholarly community and policy makers. It is of considerable relevance to those interested in the Southeast Asian region… regionalism and regional collaboration more broadly, given that issues such as sovereignty and intervention… are of global relevance.

He does suggest that I might have set ASEAN’s non-interference principle within the context of international law and the UN Charter, which is fair enough, although the thrust of my argument is that norms have to be understood politically, not legalistically.

There is a rather stranger criticism in Ramses’ claim that the two Cold War case studies (East Timor and Cambodia) ‘do not offer any strong evidence to inquire into the practical implementation of ASEAN’s principles’, because Indonesia’s annexation of East Timor ‘was viewed as an internal Indonesian issue by ASEAN’, while ‘Cambodia was not a member of ASEAN’ and ‘the Association would argue that its policies were in response to Vietnam’s military intervention in Cambodia’.

These claims are odd since they are anticipated and refuted in the book. A central part of the argument about East Timor is that ASEAN selectively chose to identify it as an ‘internal’ affair, in order to use the ‘non-interference’ principle to protect Indonesia whilst it brutally annexed a state that had declared itself independent and sovereign. That ASEAN ‘viewed’ it as internal is not neutral or incidental but a political choice – and one rejected by virtually every other third-world state at the time (pp. 71-73). This selectivity is precisely underscored by its diametrically opposite reaction to the Vietnamese intervention to overthrow Pol Pot, where it screamed ‘intervention!’ to high heaven and fomented civil war for a decade. I quote a Thai diplomat who observes: ‘What happened in East Timor was exactly the same thing, in principle, as what the Vietnamese did to Cambodia: a foreign invaded, occupied Cambodia; a foreign-invaded, occupied East Timor’ (p. 75). But whereas ASEAN ‘looked the other way’ on East Timor (and in fact assisted Indonesia), it did everything it could short of directly confronting Vietnam militarily to overturn the post-Pol Pot regime in Cambodia. What ‘the Association would argue’ is neither here nor there – the literature is full of judgements echoing elite self-justification, as the book demonstrates.These rarely make sense in their own terms, anyway – for instance, if it matters that ‘Cambodia was not a member of ASEAN’, why is ASEAN’s reaction so universally explained as a defence of ASEAN’s non-interference principle, which would not presumably apply to non-members? What actually matters here is the self-evident hypocrisy of ASEAN governments, their very uneven application of sovereignty norms, and how we explain it. That is what the book sets out to do.

A]n interesting contribution… the book addresses a highly relevant area of research from both scholarly and policy perspectives… Through its approach and originality, it complements existing literature by offering new insights. The book can be recommended to the scholarly community and policy makers. It is of considerable relevance to those interested in the Southeast Asian region… regionalism and regional collaboration more broadly, given that issues such as sovereignty and intervention… are of global relevance.

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=8050New Review of ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asiahttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=777
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=777#respondWed, 12 Jun 2013 08:24:48 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=777A couple of friends have pointed out a review of my book which I’d not seen before, by history professor Christopher Gennari, inEast Asian Integration Studies. It’s a positive review with a pithy edge to it:

Jones’ work is an important and significant contribution to academic literature… Jones clearly places himself against the current of the typical historiography… This is not some drool account of vapid diplomacy; this work is a forthright presentation of ideas and positions. And, for its part, it loves pointing out hypocrisy.

It’s also a bit strange, though, when it comes to criticise the book’s alleged ‘omissions’. Gennari’s main point here is that I assume too high a level of knowledge and don’t give enough background to readers. For example, he suggests I don’t tell readers who Adam Malik was – but he is identified as Indonesia’s foreign minister on p.39, p.46, and p.58. He asks ‘Who was Suharto before he took over Indonesia’s government?’ But on p.44 he is identified: ‘senior right-wing elements in the army leadership headed by General Suharto…’ Gennari continues: ‘There is also no mention of which countries are in ASEAN and when they join. Does Vietnam join?’ Actually p.45 lists the countries involved in founding ASEAN, while p.143 states ‘Vietnam… joined the Association in 1995’. He is right that I don’t provide a general introduction to ASEAN as an organisation, but that’s not the book’s purpose and plenty of other work does this (despite his claim that ASEAN ‘does not receive much research attention’, it is actually the second most written-about regional grouping in the world after the EU). It seems odd to suggest the narrative occurs in a ‘vacuum’ without reference to Sino-Soviet rivalry or the Vietnam war since this is a major aspect of Part I of the book. He suggests there are other ‘surprising points missing’ ; for example, ‘the genocide in Cambodia is not mentioned… Cambodian refugees flooded into Thailand to escape the genocide – certainly this became an ASEAN issue. If not, why not?’. But on p.56 I note: ‘the Thai army engag[ed] in “grisly cooperation” with Pol Pot’s genocidal regime by shooting anyone trying to flee into Thailand’, and chapter 4, entitled ‘Representation, Refugees and Rebels’, devotes three pages to discussing ASEAN’s manipulation of refugees. That Pol Pot’s regime was genocidal is also mentioned on pp. 77, 85, and 88. He goes on: ‘The same deficient also applies to another case study state of East Timor where the Indonesian government was notoriously brutal. It seems strange to have a book this incisive yet never mention the elephant in the room.’ But pp.73-74 describes the ‘disastrous’ impact of the Indonesian invasion, the army’s ‘brutal counterinsurgency campaigns’, which killed c.102,800 people and caused a further 84,200-182,000 to die through hunger and disease, and identifies the occupation as ‘third-world imperialism’.

So, while I’m glad Prof Gennari liked the book, perhaps he could have read it a little more carefully!

You can listen to the show here; my segment starts about 42 minutes in.

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=7500Lowy Institute Books of the Yearhttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=714
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=714#respondMon, 17 Dec 2012 08:47:56 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=714ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asia has been selected as one of the Lowy Institute for International Policy‘s books of the year. The Lowy Institute is Australia’s ‘top think tank’, an Antipodean equivalent of Britain’s Chatham House when it comes to international affairs. The citation, by former director Malcolm Cook, reads:

This year I had the pleasure of reviewing Lee Jones’ first book, which is commendable for its intellectual bravery. The book takes on the myth of the ‘ASEAN Way’ and its cherished non-intervention norm and does a good job of dispelling it. It also fights against the tide of intellectual laziness by clearly distinguishing between Southeast Asian states and ASEAN as a regional organisation and shows how these states have used ASEAN to pursue their national interests. As ASEAN continues to succeed in its attempt to be in the ‘driving seat’ of regionalism, Jones’ book gives us a better understanding of the ‘driver’ and what we can expect from its driving.

A flattering end to the year.

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=7140Joern Dosch reviews ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asiahttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=707
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=707#respondTue, 30 Oct 2012 17:18:25 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=707Professor Joern Dosch of Leeds University has written an extraordinarily generous review of my book for the newsletter of the Association of Southeast Asian Studies. Here is an excerpt:

There can be no doubt whatsoever that Lee Jones has written one of the most original, innovative and thought-provoking books on ASEAN of recent years. The term “page-turner” is not usually used to characterise academic works, but this analysis is so clearly and intriguingly written that it is hard to lay the book down. Even the most seasoned ASEAN experts will discover new facets to Southeast Asian regionalism in Jones’ thoroughly stimulating monograph… The book not only makes an important theoretical contribution to the study of Southeast Asian regionalism as it transcends the great divide between social constructivism and neo-realism but, equally important, provides a valuable insight into the way that member states interact with one another… Lee Jones’ book would not be a great one, if it was not controversial in parts.

This is high praise coming from Prof Dosch, whose work on the domestic influences on foreign policy has itself tried to break out of the stale constructivism/realism debate that so stultifies the study of Southeast Asian IR. I quote his unusually honest assessment of the field in my conclusion, when he says that over the last two decades,

despite the impressive volume of analysis, the discourse on Southeast Asian regionalism has not distinctly progressed. This is not surprising in view of the unchanging nature of the analytical object: ASEAN’s lack of institutional evolution, and most member states’ reluctance to touch upon the sensitive issue of national sovereignty, make it difficult for students of ASEAN to add any new and original findings to the debate.

I’m glad that I did not fall foul of this offence!

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=7070First Review of ASEAN bookhttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=699
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=699#respondFri, 31 Aug 2012 08:51:08 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=699The first review of ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asia was published this month in Contemporary Southeast Asia, written by Prof Malcolm Cook, dean of the School of International Studies at Flinders University in Adelaide. Since this is my first book I’m naturally relieved that this first review is commendably fair-minded, even-handed and pretty positive, notwithstanding several points of criticism:

Lee Jones’ new book on ASEAN and the states of Southeast Asia is refreshingly iconoclastic… a worthwhile independent contribution to the literature and our understanding of ASEAN’s development… ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asia is an impressive first book by Lee Jones of particular value for scholars and students of ASEAN, contemporary Southeast Asia, regional organizations and applied International Relations theory. It opens up a new, rich field of enquiry and debate for the study of ASEAN. As a good book does, it questions the answers of conventional wisdom while its own answers generate new questions as well.

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=6990ASEAN, Sovereignty and Intervention in Southeast Asiahttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=677
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=677#respondWed, 11 Jan 2012 19:12:56 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=677At long last, and after lengthy delays, my first book has now been published:

I gave a talk about it at the National University of Singapore in November, and one of the attendees kindly did a nice write-up of it, which you can access here.

]]>http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?feed=rss2&p=6770Critical Interventions on Statebuildinghttp://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=659
http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=659#respondMon, 27 Jun 2011 07:28:37 +0000http://www.leejones.tk/blog/wordpress/?p=659The Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding has just published my review of two new titles:

International Statebuilding: The Rise of Post-Liberal Governance by David Chandler. Abingdon: Routledge, 2010

Regulating Statehood: State Building and the Transformation of the Global Order by ShaharHameiri. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.